|
Post by swamprat on Jul 28, 2011 11:28:40 GMT -5
PHYSORG
Astrophysicists apply new logic to downplay the probability of extraterrestrial lifeJuly 27, 2011 by Bob Yirka David Spiegel of Princeton University and Edwin Turner from the University of Tokyo have published a paper on arXiv that turns the Drake equation on its head. Instead of assuming that life would naturally evolve if conditions were similar to that found here on Earth, the two use Bayesian reasoning to show that just because we evolved in such conditions, doesn’t mean that the same occurrence would necessarily happen elsewhere; using evidence of our own existence doesn’t show anything they argue, other than that we are here. The Drake equation, developed in 1960 by Frank Drake uses probability and statistics to derive the possibility of life existing elsewhere in the universe. The data for it comes from observations of the known universe, i.e. the number of stars and solar systems that can be seen, the number that are thought likely to have conditions similar to our own, etc. It’s this equation and its results that drive much of the belief that there surely must be life out there; hopefully, intelligent life. The problem with all this though, is that so much of it is based on assumptions that have no real basis in reality. As Spiegel and Turner point out, basing our expectations of life existing on other planets, for no better reason that it exists here, is really only proof that were are more than capable of deceiving ourselves into thinking that things are much more likely than they really are. The two argue that just because intelligent life occurred rather quickly here on Earth, once conditions were ripe, giving rise to the people we are today, that doesn’t mean it naturally would on another planet just like ours in another place in the universe. There are other factors after all, that could have contributed to us being here that we don’t yet understand. So, they contend, deriving numbers from an equation such as that put forth by Drake, only serves to bump up our belief in the existence of other alien life forms, not the actual chances of it being so. When taken at face value, some might conclude that such arguments hold no more logic than arguments for the existence of God, i.e. it’s more about faith, than science. At any rate, most would agree that the only concrete way to prove whether there is life out there or not is to prove it, by finding it. www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-astrophysicists-logic-downplay-probability-extraterrestrial.html
|
|
|
Post by lawsinium on Sept 12, 2011 16:23:12 GMT -5
As you said, the only way to find life out there is to find one. Is it possible? Yes! where is the evidence? Us! If you believe in evolution, my 2 cents tells me an inteligent life exists out there. Will they be the same as us? my 2 cents say nope. 99% not probable unless they are our ancestors i called Space Humans (the 1%). Why? natural law of evolution.
|
|
isaackoi
Full Member
British Barrister
Posts: 104
|
Post by isaackoi on Sept 13, 2011 6:47:40 GMT -5
PHYSORG At any rate, most would agree that the only concrete way to prove whether there is life out there or not is to prove it, by finding it.
Indeed. Some of you may be familiar with the seminal 1959 paper "Searching for Interstellar Communications" by Giuseppe Cocconi and Philip Morrison in Nature, which concluded with the following sentence: The probability of success is difficult to estimate; but if we never search the chance of success is zero.
The text of that classic and ground-breaking paper is on various websites, including at: www.bigear.org/vol1no1/interste.htm(NATURE, vol. 184, no. 4690, pages 844- 846, Sept. 19, 1959) All the best, Isaac
|
|
|
Post by jeffdanielk on Nov 22, 2011 17:45:11 GMT -5
It is difficult to draw and extrapolate a line on a graph based on only one data point. The only example of life that we know of is here on earth. So, we do not have enough data to estimate to percentage of planets that developed life. We do not know exactly how life first formed on earth. We don't know how probable this occurence is. Every star in the universe could have planets with life or earth might be the only planet with life. With the data we have now, there is no logical scientific way to make an estimate!
|
|
|
Post by lawsinium on Nov 27, 2011 23:38:58 GMT -5
Well actually, the first thing we need to consider here is: What is Life in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by cuthbertj on Nov 29, 2011 20:58:00 GMT -5
By their reasoning, just because our sun developed in this region of space doesn't mean a sun developed in other regions of space, given similar conditions. In fact given the existence of anything anywhere doesn't imply the existence of similar things anywhere else. Seems like the fundamental idea missing from their work (just guessing from my reading of the OP) is that they assume the most basic idea of all science is wrong...that the laws of physics, math, chemistry, evolution, etc. don't necessarily apply everywhere in the universe. But if that's the case, then anything goes.
|
|
|
Post by lawsinium on Dec 1, 2011 23:18:26 GMT -5
well there is one thing that applies in everything...and this is the law of nature: everything reacts and adapts to its own environment. This is how things evolve. And because of this there is a slim chance that humans like us will exist somewhere in the universe.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2012 19:34:50 GMT -5
For me there is more debating whether life exist out there. There is enough evidence in UFO sightings, close encounters, and abductions that there is other life. The question is who are they? What is their culture like? What part of the galaxy are these people from?
|
|
|
Post by nobrainer on Jul 19, 2012 1:48:31 GMT -5
I'm surprised that this discussion has not picked up since November. Drakes equasion annoyed me because it was too simplistic and always being used at the beginning of a SETI lecture. SETI with all the sophisticated technology was finally run out of money. Read the July/August 2012 Playboy "BEYOND THE SKY" by Rob Magnuson Smith (search for aliens). I loved the discussion on CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) radiation. Seems they will never have enough data. One individual simply looked at her shoes when asked about it. This was prescient and honest. Stephen Hawkings was even dragged into the discussion. CNN Larry King had used him as a prop to warn of possible negative consequences of contact with advanced civilizations. Another article in this issue was on Afghanistan: "HOW WE LOST THE WAR" by Shashank Bengali. In by brain the two are connected because it explains why the creature responsible for manufacturing these machines doesn't want anything to do with us. Admiral Mullen former Chairman of the Joint Chief on Staff said the Americans were arrogant. I'm sure he was being generous.
|
|
|
Post by jeffdanielk on Jul 19, 2012 17:16:21 GMT -5
If advanced aliens want to attack us, they will. There is nothing will can do about it. We have been announcing our location for over 100 years by using radio, tv, and radar. But it can't hurt to listen for alien signals. If we find even one, we will know for sure that we are not alone.
|
|
|
Post by nobrainer on Jul 24, 2012 13:14:52 GMT -5
I love the fantasy of Alien invasion, as does Hollwood and a certain economist, who suggested this will get us organized to combat economic malaise, the way WWII ended the depression. The problem is too many light years away. In addition what do we really have. Remember alchemist trying to make lead into gold. Something really technically versed in power may not need supernovas to create new elements but do it on the cheap with technology we still don't understand. Neanderthals, in contempt of science and intelligence, will say"I have a science project for you" when it is technology we're working with. Where did our last 6 decades of war get us except to make a few psychopaths in the military industrial complex wealthy.
|
|
|
Post by nobrainer on Jul 26, 2012 9:36:16 GMT -5
NYT op-ed contributor Adam Frank had a very sober article Alone in the Void 24 July 12. There were also alot of good comments that put this blog in the dust. I still insist that these are remote controled or autonamous elecromagnetic survey machines coming out of our earth built by creatures that may have witnessed extinction on the surface of the planet caused by different extraterrestrial phenomina, some of which we have only come to realize recently. They monitor our communications and on rare occasions will generate commotion to observe reaction. They know all about our evolution and are cynical about our future. The government is hugh and there has to be people that know this and also that they do not want to communicate with us because we worship psychopaths with narcissistic personalities.
|
|
|
Post by jeffdanielk on Jul 26, 2012 19:17:56 GMT -5
nobrainer: What makes you think UFOs are from underground? What evidence of this do you have? Where do they live? In a cave? In underground vaults? At the center of the earth? Just curious about your opinions.
|
|
|
Post by nobrainer on Jul 29, 2012 1:30:43 GMT -5
A guy by the name of IVAN T SANDERSON started this line of thinking. I'll let you look him up on the internet. I thought this was a little crazy. Then I had a major earthquake near my house in late 85. where I had never experienced one before. WSUS FM announced that the epicenter was at Wanaqu NJ reservoir (14 miles away) , where there was a notorious sighting in Feb 66. When I looked up a WEB page on earthquakes and typed in the Long & Lat of the reservoir, it showed numerous earthquakes every year since 43, but they are too weak to be felt. 1985 & 1986 had zero? I watched one of these machines years ago fly right into manhatten, low and slow, a few days after CBS TV had a 1 hour broadcast (6 Oct 66) hosted by Walter Cronkite saying these things were natural or illusions. What caught my eye was that the NYT never mentioned it in their paper. It was in your face and UFO did not cross my mind untill I noticed the omission. Forget alien abductions. Forget Roswell. One of these would have crashed many times over before the Cold War started and why did it become popular to get abducted by aliens all of a sudden, as if they they don't know what's going on here. I believe they are watching our TV. The mammals survived the dinosaurs by being underground. The surface of the planet is subject to annihilation and we have no solution other than to make movies about this. As for Wanaque, the reservoir has the Ramopo fault doing a switchback underneath. This also goes below Indian Point neuclear reactor, north of NYC, which is claimed was built before they knew about the fault and that the fault is inactive. Caves are ugly places to live but start thinking about millions of years of technology, things like Ebola viruses up here and incoming extraterrestrial hazards and it starts to look better. Where can these things be coming from? Earths surface is the optimum for evolution. The gravity is perfect as is the temperature. The rest of the solar system is a stretch. They might be there but it would be very awkward. This is obviously home but every now and then you have to worry about extinction on the surface. I believe the Wanaque reservoir machine was an unmanned survey probe coming out of the earth and flying in electromagnetic ground effect. What evidence do I have? The government actually consists of people that lust for personal power and not technical answers that are awkward. If their lips are moving then you know all about the market meltdown, derivatives, LIBOR etc and how powerful the elite are. Wall St uses PHD Quantum Physics degrees to program their computers but this thing will not bow down to them so it can not exist.
|
|
|
Post by nobrainer on Aug 6, 2012 13:51:45 GMT -5
A point on proof. It all depends on who is producing it and who is accepting it. Just think about WMDs in Iraq and things like does Israel have nuclear weapons and when did they test them? UFOs existence is not a technical but a political problem.
|
|